Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2014 14:00:09 GMT -8
I like Mindheim's work and to a lesser extent Soeborg's.
I've never understood the mystique of John Allen's Gorre and Daphetid. Now to me that is unrealistic and looks more like a Six Flags ride than a prototype railroad.
I've never been a fan of Furlow's work as everything he does looks the same to me.
I'll agree that a little less might be a lot more with Sellios' layout.
The one thing that all layouts lack is life. Cars, people, animals, etc. never move. The trains roll along through a frozen in time world. Looks like something out of Star Trek. All we need is Spock, Bones, Scotty and Kirk.
While some have tried animation, I've yet to see anyone really do it in a convincing manner.
|
|
|
|
Post by wp8thsub on Jun 16, 2014 14:14:06 GMT -8
I've never understood the mystique of John Allen's Gorre and Daphetid. Now to me that is unrealistic and looks more like a Six Flags ride than a prototype railroad. It's aesthetically pleasing in a certain way. People outside the hobby can relate to it because they see the obvious attempts at artistry involved. Many hobbyists like to copy other layouts and have no interest at all in modeling from the real world. Some of these people hate prototype based modeling and, instead of seeing Allen as a product of his times with regard to design, operations and control systems, see his eclectic modeling as a big middle finger to modern trends in realism. There are other forum sites where that comes up too often. I get the appeal of Allen's work for what is was, but have no desire whatsoever to emulate it. I look at Sellios the same way. Then again, I'm not much of a fan of other types of abstraction either. Maybe because it's so derivative of others? His first Rio Chama layout was a G&D clone. His newer stuff is similar to the paintings he sells with exaggerated southwest themes. |
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Jun 16, 2014 14:50:57 GMT -8
I've never understood the mystique of John Allen's Gorre and Daphetid. Now to me that is unrealistic and looks more like a Six Flags ride than a prototype railroad. It's aesthetically pleasing in a certain way. People outside the hobby can relate to it because they see the obvious attempts at artistry involved. Many hobbyists like to copy other layouts and have no interest at all in modeling from the real world. Some of these people hate prototype based modeling and, instead of seeing Allen as a product of his times with regard to design, operations and control systems, see his eclectic modeling as a big middle finger to modern trends in realism. There are other forum sites where that comes up too often. I get the appeal of Allen's work for what is was, but have no desire whatsoever to emulate it. I look at Sellios the same way. Then again, I'm not much of a fan of other types of abstraction either. SNIp The G&D definitely looks rather cartoonish to the model railroaders of 2014. In 1970, it was quite different. Allen was ahead of his time with many things, from weathering to use of forced perspective. By today's standards, pretty weak stuff taken as a whole with a half-century of changes in the hobby. In comparison to others in the hobby at the time, he stood out as pushing the envelope, often in directions that made some uncomfortable. He did have a chuckle or two at the expense of rivetcounters. But he also took cracks at diesel salesmen, those with their noses in the air, and others. I've got a feeling John could build to any prototype within the standards of the day, it's just that he did other things with that talent. The changing views of Allen reflect something I think we should also keep in mind. No one is either a pure craftsperson or solely a model railroad artist. We're all somewhere on a sliding scale in between and likely to move around from time to time on it in our preferences. The art world is know for its spats, just like model railroaders. I think one thing that generates considerable comment in the art world is the value and attention given to criticism, constructive criticism. It's valued highly by artists, because critics should at least attempt to relate to the piece on its own terms, as well as on the critic's terms. That thing in model railroading where someone says they don't like where a certain handrail ended up on a model, so it's 100% wrong, a disaster, and all those with even a remote role in its creation should be tarred, feathered and rode out of town on a fence rail is something most artists would find shallow, contemptible, and unworthy of discussion. Criticism is intended to be useful and thought provoking. |
|
|
|
Post by antoniofp45 on Jun 16, 2014 17:50:41 GMT -8
Intriguing variety of intelligent responses. I view model railroading as having the options of enjoying it as an art, a craft, a hobby or a combination of all three for the reasons already posted on this thread. Jim, your thought below reminded me that I'm guilty of the "Happy Place" or "state of calm" syndrome. I was a small kid during the 60s in NYC. At that time the Bronx was experiencing urban decay (as were many urban areas in the northern USA). Yet, I was oblivious to issues such as: segregation, civil rights clashes in Bombingham Alabama, the Vietnam conflict, the growing toxic pollution of the Hudson River, and urban riots around the country. I remember a clean home, my Dad working long hours, me watching prototype trains from a window, playing with my toy trains, learning to read, watching shows like F-Troop, Star Trek, and a smattering of Warner Bros and Hanna Barbera cartoons! I did see crumbling buildings and trash on some streets when we went out shopping or visiting but not on a huge scale. I do remember my Dad saying quips (in Spanish) like: "Agh! Those Beatles are hippies!" and on one occasion "Oh! Martin King was killed!" I didn't become interested in current events until I was about 11 years old. I had no in-depth appreciation about: Inflation, Vietnam, LSD/Heroin junkies, Civil Rights battles, or street gangs. So the "1960s-70s" world that I'm modeling is a view of how things, generally, appeared to me in those days. It will be free of those hard charging issues and tragedies because, while they're very thought provoking, they certainly can be stress inducing issues. I prefer to enjoy this hobby in a manner that relaxes me and helps me mentally get away from the daily stresses of work. On a whole model railroads don't make people pause and think. Scenery is blended with back drops. Rolling stock is weathered. Rolling stock and track is true to prototype. To which I say, yeah so.... Standard non earth shattering stuff. Did it take effort and talent? Yes, but no matter how well any of the above was done, it is just too perfect. In other words 99.99% of the model railroads portray the world as one big happy place......to which we all know it is NOT! I saw a military diorama of a World War II German railway with armed German solders and the eagle with the swastika on the side of the locomotive cab. It was not an SS train taking the Jews to the ovens, which would be too much for viewers. This was a German regular army or Wehrmacht supply train so it was at least a little benign. The modeling was outstanding, but I couldn't help but feel my eyes were drawn to the swastika and how uneasy it made me feel. I would like to challenge or see a modeler who's prototype is based in the southern and southeast United States during the either the 40's, 50's or 60's, model Jim Crow. Have a station with TWO entrances and signs that say "White" and "Colored". Have the white passengers separated from black. Put the little HO scale black passengers in the back of the bus. Businesses with "White Only" on their windows. Touchy subject? You bet!!!!! But boy would that make the viewer not only highly uncomfortable, but should also provoke thoughtfulness as to where we have evolved as a society and where we still need to go. What about being published in Model Railroader or RMC? Not on your life! Model southern California or Los Angeles in the mid-1960's. Riots in the streets with the little HO people and burned out buildings. Nope I don't think this is making the cover of Model Railroader or RMC, let alone grace any part of the magazine. Model the less desirable side of a modern city? Gang graffiti on the buildings? Drug dealing? Shootings? Some little HO person lying in a pool of blood? Beat downs? Cops frisking gang bangers? Stripped and abandoned cars....okay that is possibility. But everything else is taboo and this layout surely isn't making any magazine or layout tour! Its too real and too scary. On layouts, how many little HO scale military personnel coming home from battle are missing arms or legs or confined to a wheelchair? Let's stay away from that visual! Nope, our little HO scale world is perfect. There is never a bad day, never any racism, sexism, discrimination, violent crime, loss of life or other horrible occurrences. Nope even our traffic accidents are sterile, some crumpled fenders and a couple of HO scale people maybe having an argument. An HO scale person dead with their head through the windshield and blood dripping all around ain't making the cut....sorry a bad pun. Our art is sterile, it provokes no uncomfortableness in the viewer, it provokes no deep thought, it provokes no raw emotion. We could do a lot more to accurately model the real world but 99.9999% won't touch it with a ten foot pole. |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Jun 17, 2014 1:51:55 GMT -8
The G&D definitely looks rather cartoonish to the model railroaders of 2014. In 1970, it was quite different. Allen was ahead of his time with many things, from weathering to use of forced perspective. The G&D looked just as cartoonish to me then as it does now- just as I could tell a cartoon from a film. It's interesting the same way Big Thunder Mountain at Disneyland or Indiana Jones is. But it's not modeling a railroad. I've always been interested in "Prototype Modeling", before there was a name for it. Not exactly a breaking CNN news story but,even in John's day there was those that didn't like the G&D since it was too whimsical for their taste. I never liked it and always thought it was highly overrated by MR,RMC and most adult modelers(I was a teenager and grew weary of seeing photos and articles on the G&D).There was more realistic and prototypical layouts back then. "Prototype Modeling" isn't a modern thing as some may think..I got started in prototype modeling after reading "Aberdeen & Rockfish-A railroad you can model" in MR back in the early 60s. That also started my love for short lines and shortly after I started modeling freelance short lines based on believability. As a foot note..Those of us that was leaning more toward "Prototypical Modeling" was thought to be "radical modelers/rivet counters" by the older "superior" modelers of the time. |
|
|
|
Post by bar on Jun 17, 2014 12:27:59 GMT -8
Model building in general is a form of folk art, not fine art. We don't go to school for years to learn basic techniques, or apprentice for still more years to obtain the secrets of the masters. But, ordinary people have been building miniatures and painting backdrops on cave walls since the dawn of civilization. So, you can say folk art predates fine art. If you have to call something fine art in order convince people it is...it ain't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2014 12:52:24 GMT -8
Model building in general is a form of folk art, not fine art. We don't go to school for years to learn basic techniques, or apprentice for still more years to obtain the secrets of the masters. But, ordinary people have been building miniatures and painting backdrops on cave walls since the dawn of civilization. So, you can say folk art predates fine art. If you have to call something fine art in order convince people it is...it ain't. I'll take it a step forward. The viewer should be able on their own to recognize if something is art or something else. When you work to convince people its art, it doesn't necessarily mean its art. It just means you are a good salesman. |
|
|
|
Post by WP 257 on Jun 17, 2014 13:17:48 GMT -8
I think those of you who might have access to the latest edition of the Brown Book of Brass Locomotives by Dan Glasure would do well to read his discussion on this particular topic...or perhaps more close to home, some of Jason Shron's (forgive if I mispelled) posts on manufacturing.
Briefly summarized: Every brass model involves many hundreds--even thousands--of hours of research, and they are very limited production run projects. He believes that the models themselves constitute art based upon the techniques and high levels of artistry/workmanship required even to produce them and the many more hours invested into a typical brass model (could be extrapolated to any well done model train, really) than the hours invested in some "fine art". As such, the brass collectors are basically hoping the day will finally come when others will look upon the models as being valuable for the work represented to produce them and how well done they were for the given time period, etc...
Obviously, few seem to share that opinion, as Dan's still trying to blow out copies of the book at only about $25 each for what was originally an $80 book...but perhaps that goes to the recent near collapse of brass models in general?
Some stuff that was considered useable, almost throwaway, years ago--like depression era glass--is collected as "art" today.
So if something is an accurate model to precise engineering tolerances or measurements that somehow voids it as being "art"? What about the sheer artistry and level of skill required to make it in the first place? If making fine models was easy then perhaps more would do it?
|
|
|
|
Post by rapidotrains on Jun 17, 2014 13:35:34 GMT -8
I've really enjoyed this discussion and I'm glad I started it. I think that any creative output that tells a story is art. Many model railroads do just that - they tell a story. They recreate a specific time and place (even if that is imaginary) and give you a glimpse into that world. The builder/artist may not be aware that they are making art, and may end up telling a different story to the viewer than they originally intended. You can call me post- postmodern, but I don't believe that art is only the purview of established artists or people that a select group of "experts" have agreed are artists. You don't need an Academic background to be an artist. You don't need to be a highly-skilled painter, sculptor or draftsman. Everyone is capable of artistic expression and I believe that a lot of model railroads fall into that category. Another, related category is photographs of model railroads. The framing and atmosphere created by a photograph of a really amazing model railroad can tell its own story and become an independent work of art in and of itself. That's why I love Fred Lagno's photos so much. They tell a story. Check out the one below. -Jason  |
|
|
|
Post by bar on Jun 17, 2014 14:22:52 GMT -8
It's a well-composed photo, for sure, and to each his own. I would point out that there are no figures in the scene, which leaves it void of emotion, to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2014 14:31:58 GMT -8
It's a well-composed photo, for sure, and to each his own. I would point out that there are no figures in the scene, which leaves it void of emotion, to me. Great photos do not make for great modeling either. There are many over-sized items like the power lines and the street light looks like O scale. The sidewalk is so chopped up it would be closed as unsafe in the real world. The trees in the background look like weeds picked out of the sidewalk with some Woodland Scenics sprinkled on them. Plus, for fall foliage they are not realistic. And as BAR pointed out....NO PEOPLE. Did the body snatchers come down and vaporize the population? Bottom line nice photo, so-so modeling and I am hardly impressed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2014 14:49:47 GMT -8
Model building in general is a form of folk art, not fine art. We don't go to school for years to learn basic techniques, or apprentice for still more years to obtain the secrets of the masters. But, ordinary people have been building miniatures and painting backdrops on cave walls since the dawn of civilization. So, you can say folk art predates fine art. If you have to call something fine art in order convince people it is...it ain't. The more prototypical a model is, the less it is art. Do you want your models to be more like art objects, or more like models- that is, replicas or copies of objects or processes? Hey, someone that actually understands this MODEL RAILROADING, not a night at Louvre. If we want the hobby to be "art" then why are the manufacturers of our toys putting so much detail on these models that the only thing they are missing is diesel fuel? Why not paint some blue box SD40-2 blue, put a red nose on the front and call it "Clownrail"? Or paint some $900 brass piece pink with purple polka dots? This is MODEL RAILROADING, meaning you MODEL REAL railroad equipment and REALISTIC surroundings. The painting of backdrops is nice, but its no different than the $25 painting of a hill with birds, complete with frame you get at the Ramada Inn "Starving Artist" sale. Many can't pull it off, even if a backdrop came as a paint by number. Heck even a paint by number "canvas" could be considered art. I harbor no delusions of grandeur as far as model railroading. In the end its usually a bunch of men playing with toy trains, which is what I'd hazard much of the general public feel about the hobby. I believe the talk of model railroading as a form of art is inane. Some areas of the hobby require touch, but please, lets get grip. The only thing a discussion like accomplishes is to raise boundaries and noses by the people "with talent" or self perceived talent and the rest most unworthy lot. |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Jun 17, 2014 14:54:10 GMT -8
And as BAR pointed out....NO PEOPLE. Did the body snatchers come down and vaporize the population?
--------------------------------
I have drove down the main street here in Bucyrus at 2 PM weekdays and see nobody on the sidewalk..
Where are they?
Small cities like Bucyrus one doesn't see that many folk walking on the sidewalks if any..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2014 14:56:57 GMT -8
And as BAR pointed out....NO PEOPLE. Did the body snatchers come down and vaporize the population? -------------------------------- I have drove down the main street here in Bucyrus at 2 PM weekdays and see nobody on the sidewalk.. Where are they? Small cities like Bucyrus one doesn't see that many folk walking on the sidewalks if any.. I was in Bucyrus for a dog show in 2003 and yup it was a little under populated! |
|
|
|
Post by bar on Jun 17, 2014 17:33:37 GMT -8
I can still appreciate the skill level needed to make, say, a $2000 brass locomotive. But there's a difference between an artist and an artisan.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Jun 17, 2014 18:20:42 GMT -8
And as BAR pointed out....NO PEOPLE. Did the body snatchers come down and vaporize the population? -------------------------------- I have drove down the main street here in Bucyrus at 2 PM weekdays and see nobody on the sidewalk.. Where are they? Small cities like Bucyrus one doesn't see that many folk walking on the sidewalks if any.. People are hard to model, mostly because their motion is diffult to model. This is one reason many modelers do scenes that naturally lack people: loco facilities, ROW away from towns, etc. I just "turn my brain off" to the lack of people in urban scenes and dig the scene as-is. The motion of natural objects is a killer: Walking people, moving autos, rushing water (especially surf or rapids), swaying trees, flying birds... It's usually just best to avoid them. Which is kind of a bummer- I've lived and worked on the SoCal coast including on the San Diegans running just 100 ft from the crashing Pacific. But no one models it because frozen surf next to a moving train is just wrong. I think it's the paradox that is jarring. I fully agree..Also those "action" scenes like a fire or accident looks fake too as does the cutesy pie scenes and those funny names for offices and industries takes away believability.. |
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Jun 17, 2014 19:10:58 GMT -8
Model building in general is a form of folk art, not fine art. We don't go to school for years to learn basic techniques, or apprentice for still more years to obtain the secrets of the masters. But, ordinary people have been building miniatures and painting backdrops on cave walls since the dawn of civilization. So, you can say folk art predates fine art. If you have to call something fine art in order convince people it is...it ain't. Fine art, folk art, it's all art. In fact, the idea that there's a difference between what a Picasso does and what your grandma does -- quilting, needlepoint, etc -- is now considered to be an elitist concept. I'm sure Picasso's agent, were he still alive, would be disappointed by how that might impact sales, but that's not the point of art. Nor is the point to be pretentious. Nor is the point to go to school for years to "learn" art when everyone's an artist already anyway. There are no "secrets of the masters" that one has to be admitted to by some insider handshake. In fact, the argument that fine art came after folk art, yet is something different, is an idea originally propagated by those looking for profit and market share. Certainly, the very earliest forms of expression we have evidence of -- cave paintings, figurines (perhaps associated with religious practices), ornamental objects -- are art in the modern concept. Art is any form of personal expression that you or others find meaning in. That's all. That's why it's not much of a leap to consider model railroading as an art form, as just one of the many other things it can be considered. If one doesn't want to find any deeper meaning than in building a convincing replica of something nor call themselves an artist, that's OK, too. If you do things without meaning habitually, well, that's interesting...  |
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Jun 17, 2014 19:21:53 GMT -8
It's a well-composed photo, for sure, and to each his own. I would point out that there are no figures in the scene, which leaves it void of emotion, to me. That's a statement where you mark it as art, whether you intended it that way or not, even whether you like it or not, whether you even recognize that it's art. Maybe it's 105 degrees on that street. A time/temp sign could pull it all together for you, maybe?  |
|
|
|
Post by WP 257 on Jun 17, 2014 20:46:06 GMT -8
I don't know:
The utility wires have a realistic droop to them; in the real world there are all different weights of cables--and some are actually rather large. They didn't jump out at me as being too large.
As someone who has to fix bad roads for a living, I'm really impressed at the rippling and washboarding of the pavement--even down to the reduced curb reveal at some locations. The sidewalks, though in poor condition with lots of vertical faulting at the joints are sadly very prototypical of many small towns in Pennsylvania--and wouldn't be condemned because the politicians usually fear raising the ire of the tax paying property owners (who in our state would usually have to foot the bill for the repairs per law).
I understand good figures can be difficult and expensive to come by...
To me, I'd have to say the scene is art in itself. Though we can nitpick this or that perceived omission all day long, the fact is that few of us could do a better scene.
For me, it is art, but then I think a good set of plans is also a work of art.
|
|
|
|
Post by rapidotrains on Jun 18, 2014 2:22:03 GMT -8
Fine art, folk art, it's all art. In fact, the idea that there's a difference between what a Picasso does and what your grandma does -- quilting, needlepoint, etc -- is now considered to be an elitist concept. I'm sure Picasso's agent, were he still alive, would be disappointed by how that might impact sales, but that's not the point of art. Nor is the point to be pretentious. Nor is the point to go to school for years to "learn" art when everyone's an artist already anyway. There are no "secrets of the masters" that one has to be admitted to by some insider handshake. Here's some background info most of you don't know. I guess you could say I am "officially" an artist. I spent five years studying graphic design, drawing and installation art at York University and I have a Bachelor of Fine Arts. And I am also "officially" an art historian. I have a Masters in Art History, so I spent two years looking at art. And I spent three years towards a PhD in art history before abandoning it to start Rapido, so that's three more years looking at art. But despite all that, I agree with everything Mike just said. It's all art, and we are all artists. If we set out to express something through a creative act, it's art. Will plonking that Rapido model into an art gallery command "art world" prices? No. Well, sometimes - www.diazcontemporary.ca/Artists_Adams1.htmlBut the art world does not define what is art unless you are a member of the fine art community and you subscribe to those definitions. And model railroaders generally aren't and don't. At some point down the line, maybe when I'm retired, I would love to organize an art exhibition of model railroad dioramas in one of those hoity-toity galleries. My prediction based on my experience in the art world? It will be a hit and very well received, and a lot of people will say it isn't art. It will generate a fierce debate, basically what we've been talking about here but on a much larger scale. The McMichael Collection here in the Toronto area did a folk art exhibition in 1996 and got into a huge public fight with the donors. The gallery said it was art. The McMichael family said it wasn't. I saw the show and LOVED it. There will never be a consensus on this. But the discussion is very interesting. -Jason |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Jun 18, 2014 3:44:31 GMT -8
It's a well-composed photo, for sure, and to each his own. I would point out that there are no figures in the scene, which leaves it void of emotion, to me. That's a statement where you mark it as art, whether you intended it that way or not, even whether you like it or not, whether you even recognize that it's art. Maybe it's 105 degrees on that street. A time/temp sign could pull it all together for you, maybe? Mike,Offered up as food for thought. Being a former brakeman I can never call railroading a art by anybody's standard since it harsh work under harsher conditions. We emulate railroading and thus its laughable at best to think model railroading is a art especially if we strive to emulate the prototype and Mother Nature's whims and man's intrusions with our scenery.. Far to many layouts are far to perfect to be realistic from well manicured industrial areas(railroaders sees the trashy and weedy backside of industries) to spotless streets or they run to extreme with way to trashy weathering and their over weathered town buildings looks like "Sweethaven" from the movie "Popeye".. Art no..Striving to emulate real railroading yes with a balance of believability that surrounds the railroad.. |
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jun 18, 2014 4:13:11 GMT -8
The photo Jason posted ... when I first looked at it, just for a few seconds I thought it was a photo of a real place! Of course when you start to look in detail, you see items which give it away such as those things noted like really thick power lines and streets devoid of people, wow, I could never come close to that.
As for the art, one thing I know is that I haven't studied art enough to comment intelligently on it. It's a case of, the more I would open my mouth, them more ignorant I would seem to someone who truly knows about it! I know enough that I know I know very little, even though I've always had a mild interest in it. As a child I learned early that I had a decent eye for drawing but never pursued it beyond mostly what I did for school or a few things own my own. I used to have a lot more patience to draw, but now that I'm passing from middle ages, I don't have the time and patience. Maybe once the financial pressure is off and my daughter is out of college, I can think about it more again.
Cheers, Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Jun 18, 2014 5:05:34 GMT -8
Mike,Offered up as food for thought. Being a former brakeman I can never call railroading a art by anybody's standard since it harsh work under harsher conditions. We emulate railroading and thus its laughable at best to think model railroading is a art especially if we strive to emulate the prototype and Mother Nature's whims and man's intrusions with our scenery.. Far to many layouts are far to perfect to be realistic from well manicured industrial areas(railroaders sees the trashy and weedy backside of industries) to spotless streets or they run to extreme with way to trashy weathering and their over weathered town buildings looks like "Sweethaven" from the movie "Popeye".. Art no..Striving to emulate real railroading yes with a balance of believability that surrounds the railroad.. Larry, Not to get too far out on a limb here, but work can be art, too. But I won't  right now... If someone's layout is "too perfect" or too "trashy," it's an expression of how they see the world in some form. Or maybe they just don't have a knack for weathering. Or they just love to weather things. Or both. The "both" thing is key here. Being able to see more than one meaning is a key element in art. You and I can see the same thing and come to entirely different conclusions. Like "Is model railroading art?" And that's OK. No one is trying to turn anyone into an artist if they don't see what they do that way. People may still call it art, but that's them and not the artist...errr  , the non-artist. |
|
|
|
Post by bar on Jun 18, 2014 5:12:46 GMT -8
As far as Picasso, he turned out plenty of junk late in life from pencil scribbles to furniture, simply for the easy money. I guess a man's got to eat.
|
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Jun 18, 2014 5:16:56 GMT -8
The photo Jason posted ... when I first looked at it, just for a few seconds I thought it was a photo of a real place! Of course when you start to look in detail, you see items which give it away such as those things noted like really thick power lines and streets devoid of people, wow, I could never come close to that. Yes, a very different reaction than others had. All are valid reactions. Some find it unconvincing by the standards we all are familiar with as model railroaders. Others find it convincing enough to wish they could pull it off, even if it's imperfect. But even there, in imperfection, we find something that is simultaneously art and not-art. Jim T-T-N argues we're simply replicating something as closely as possible. Thing is, every model is a compromise in some way, i.e. by definition imperfect as a copy. If our goal is perfection, then there hasn't been a model made yet that meets those standards. Yes, the entire hobby is one massive mess of FAIL by that standard. But I don't think it is. Rather, it's a lot easier to think of a model railroad as an interpretation (high concept art? or ?) of the real. In that sense, every model is a success -- at some level -- although there's clearly a lot out there doesn't meet one's personal standard in the hobby. As for the art, one thing I know is that I haven't studied art enough to comment intelligently on it. It's a case of, the more I would open my mouth, them more ignorant I would seem to someone who truly knows about it! I know enough that I know I know very little, even though I've always had a mild interest in it. SNIP Maybe drawing is not your particular artistic talent? Maybe model railroading is?  In any case, one doesn't need to formally study art to know what you like or don't like. Studying art may give you the ability to more formally express your reaction to art or to serve as a take-off point in designing a project, but it's not required to appreciate the work of others or even your own. |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Jun 18, 2014 5:22:02 GMT -8
Not to get too far out on a limb here, but work can be art, too.
----------------------------
I agree some jobs could be a art like woodworking and other like crafts including working as a florist but,railroadin' for a living sure misses the mark..
|
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Jun 18, 2014 5:31:47 GMT -8
Here's some background info most of you don't know. I guess you could say I am "officially" an artist. I spent five years studying graphic design, drawing and installation art at York University and I have a Bachelor of Fine Arts. And I am also "officially" an art historian. I have a Masters in Art History, so I spent two years looking at art. And I spent three years towards a PhD in art history before abandoning it to start Rapido, so that's three more years looking at art. But despite all that, I agree with everything Mike just said. It's all art, and we are all artists. If we set out to express something through a creative act, it's art. Will plonking that Rapido model into an art gallery command "art world" prices? No. Well, sometimes - www.diazcontemporary.ca/Artists_Adams1.htmlBut the art world does not define what is art unless you are a member of the fine art community and you subscribe to those definitions. And model railroaders generally aren't and don't. At some point down the line, maybe when I'm retired, I would love to organize an art exhibition of model railroad dioramas in one of those hoity-toity galleries. My prediction based on my experience in the art world? It will be a hit and very well received, and a lot of people will say it isn't art. It will generate a fierce debate, basically what we've been talking about here but on a much larger scale. The McMichael Collection here in the Toronto area did a folk art exhibition in 1996 and got into a huge public fight with the donors. The gallery said it was art. The McMichael family said it wasn't. I saw the show and LOVED it. There will never be a consensus on this. But the discussion is very interesting. -Jason I just knew that hanging around academia as long as I have would have some use...  I've rubbed shoulders with a number of artists and art historians in my work as a historian. And it might surprise readers who've gotten this far in the thread to know that I was a lot like them a decade or so back, a confirmed art-skeptic. But it wasn't academia that really shifted my opinion on this, it was being a founder, participant, and eventually what was effectively the CEO of a community media and arts group. Part of our mission statement: "We foster the creation and distribution of media, art, and narratives emphasizing underrepresented voices and perspectives and promote empowerment and expression through media and arts education." I came from the media side of things, i.e. journalism, which now that I think about it has the same issues of fact vs. interpretation that some people are struggling with here over whether model railroading has an arts aspect to it. But I learned a lot about art in my 5 years doing everything from making sure our stage was suitable and safe to explaining to one over-eager person why we couldn't let her hang ropes from the ceiling for her to perform something or other (I forget exactly what) 20 feet in the air unless the install was done by a professional (nightmares of lawsuits going through my head.) Still not sure what either that experience or my history degree will find me work. Maybe I should start a model railroad company? Nah, I'll leave that to others like Jason, who I think can simultaneously produce awesome replicas that are also works of art. They two aspects seem to be in balance in what Rapido does -- and if that's art or not, I still buy it.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2014 6:04:07 GMT -8
But even there, in imperfection, we find something that is simultaneously art and not-art. Jim T-T-N argues we're simply replicating something as closely as possible. Thing is, every model is a compromise in some way, i.e. by definition imperfect as a copy. If our goal is perfection, then there hasn't been a model made yet that meets those standards. Yes, the entire hobby is one massive mess of FAIL by that standard. Every model is a compromise in some way or the other. But you don't use 12 ga. wire for grabs on a Broadway Limited passenger car. There is a reason why manufacturers like BLMA has introduced 0.008" grabs versus the 0.012" grabs from Detail Associates. The tooling of models today is much finer than anything in the past and even four thousandth of an inch is noticeable. Realism is at an all time high in the models and it would seem there are many who want that realism. The things that I pointed out in the Lagano photo really jumped out at me when I looked at the photo. Bottom line is I've seen much better photography and modeling. I'll say it again, I've never been impressed with Mr. Lagano's work. Could I do better? Well since I don't and never will have a layout, I can say if I did start a layout, I'd bust my butt to do better. If I couldn't do better I'd quit, for I know I can do better. Sometimes we try too hard to make a scene, such as the use of the toy train street lamps in the Lagano photo. If they had been eliminated, it would actually help the scene. Less is more with those utility cables too. There was an article on a layout in MR in the 2000's which featured the most realistic telegraph and utility lines I've ever seen, so it can be done. I know the layout dates to the 80's and some of the material used was cutting edge in 1985, but has since been rendered obsolete. Maybe this is why a layout is never finished for the builder is constantly improving the warts of the layout as better materials become available. For instance, do we use zip texturing anymore? Even Woodland Scenics who broke our bonds with zip texturing is working on new product all the time, to improve realism. There are the people that don't give a damn and close enough is good enough. That's fine, but don't you dare rain on my parade because I want to continually better my modeling and attain better adherence to prototype and prototype fidelity. The argument here is no different than the crap hurled by the "good enoughers" at the "rivet counters". Rivet counters by enlarge do not accept botched measurements, incorrect paint jobs, incorrect colors, incorrect details and shoddy tooling and workmanship. They are always looking to better the modeling and bring it closer to true scale. If it weren't for the rivet counters we'd still be running die cast Varney F-units, zip texturing, brass track and horn hook couplers, because all of that stuff is "good enough". |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Jun 18, 2014 6:27:49 GMT -8
why manufacturers like BLMA has introduced 0.008" grabs versus the 0.012" grabs from Detail Associates.
--------------------------------------
Jim,Just for general fun and old timey information.Some of us young'uns used 010" wire for grabs way back in the 60s..
Know what we was told by the older and more experience modelers? That wire is to flimsy..
We knew better..
--------------------------
The argument here is no different than the crap hurled by the "good enoughers" at the "rivet counters". Rivet counters by enlarge do not accept botched measurements, incorrect paint jobs, incorrect colors, incorrect details and shoddy tooling and workmanship. They are always looking to better the modeling and bring it closer to true scale. If it weren't for the rivet counters we'd still be running die cast Varney F-units, zip texturing, brass track and horn hook couplers, because all of that stuff is "good enough".
-----------------------------
Actually Jim,it was the good enoughers that set a lot of the so called "standards" we have today.
Even back in the 60s we adopted KD couplers as the "standard" coupler..We asked for the same detail on our diesels that the steam boys was enjoying..It wasn't easy then and we was told by the manufacturers with plastic dies its impossible to get fine detail like brass locomotives have.
Life Like listen and produce a highly detailed caboose that ravel any brass caboose followed by a highly detailed BL-2.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary P on Jun 18, 2014 7:43:26 GMT -8
Well, to me, art is in the eye of the beholder. Just like beauty.  I like mechanical things and racing, so for example..... I think a beautifully welded frame on a motorcycle or on a race car is 'art'. At least to my eyes it is! |
|
, the non-artist.
In any case, one doesn't need to formally study art to know what you like or don't like. Studying art may give you the ability to more formally express your reaction to art or to serve as a take-off point in designing a project, but it's not required to appreciate the work of others or even your own. 
